Bypass lawsuit rolls on as Warbler sits

The anti-bypass lawsuit against CalTrans and the US Army Corps of Engineers continues to move forward even as contractors gear up to start work and local environmental activists prepare for heightened protests.

While the lawyers battle it out in the courtroom, local activists seem bent on taking the battle to the fields and meadows of Little Lake Valley in an effort to delay construction.

Many within the community have been quietly organizing, conducting non-violent protest training and gearing up for a peaceful but obstructive challenge.

The apparent main hope of the organizers is for the delay to either give the courts time to consider the issue or to have the State of California reconsider the project funding.

The main symbol of the protest, a 24-year-old tree-sitter named Warbler remains perched in her protest tree, awaiting the chainsaws expected to begin work taking down the trees along the bypass footprint sometime in the next few weeks.

In court the plaintiffs, the Willits Environmental Center, the Redwood chapter of the Sierra Club, the Center for Biological Diversity, the Environmental Protection Information Center, and the California Farm Bureau. are alleging CalTrans violated the National Environmental Policy Act by failing to supplement its 2006 Environmental Impact Statement despite significant changes and circumstances to the project. The group also alleges the Corps' failed to provide sufficient environmental review of CalTrans' proposals as required by the Clean Water Act.

The two sides have been gearing up for a February 25 mediation hearing. In preparation for the hearing, the plaintiffs reviewed the information submitted by CalTrans and the Corps and noticed more than 100 missing documents believed to be germane to the case. While the Corps responded quickly to the requests for information, there was a back and forth series of motions and countermotions filed to get CalTrans to agree to provide the requested documents.

As of February 4, the two sides had apparently resolved this issue. CalTrans has agreed to provide the documents "as expeditiously as possible" if it can find them. CalTrans was given an out, in case they can't locate the documents, they are required only to "exercise due diligence to locate the documents."

In the end the judge can only rule based on documents and testimony that have been placed into evidence. CalTrans and the Corps were originally compelled to provide the court with all pertinent evidence. The more than 100 different documents requested by the plaintiffs to be added included emails between the Corps, CalTrans and mitigation groups; notes taken at meetings between CalTrans and the Corps; emails with the California Water Quality Control Board on mitigation; early design documents and various attachments. Most of the documents were referred to by CalTrans or the Corps in other provided documents, but they were not produced by either party.

The mediation efforts get underway on February 25.

If mediation efforts are unsuccessful, it is likely both sides will begin a new flurry of motions requesting the judge either dismiss the case or rule on the plaintiffs' behalf. If the case continues, the plaintiffs must file opening briefs by April 5. This triggers a new set of legal salvos with the last word being given to CalTrans on May 17.

Judge Jeffrey White will hold the final hearing on the case on June 7.

While the results of the June 7 hearing will end this phase of the litigation, it seems quite likely whoever loses will appeal.